|
On October 15 2011 05:07 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 04:58 Ack1027 wrote:
Sometimes people need to not talk or come up with their own ideas [ COOL I'M ORIGINAL ] and just listen to players vastly superior than they are.
Alv is among the best support players in dota or hon on this website. Please just stop. This is like bronze leaguers rationalizing something fundamentally incorrect as valid to a GSL code S winner. Have you not seen this site, that is exactly what happens all day theorycraftin~
We're on a forum. Either we can spam qwer a-click rapidly at one another out-last hitting each other and bragging about or fantastic relative forum positioning (Btw, i posted above you noob), or we can theory craft. Theory crafting makes assumptions, but as long as those assumptions are spelled out and the logic in the theory is sound and rigorous, it is not without merit.
|
I'm just saying like....this is why I stopped giving 2 shits about this thread.
Like, do you guys remember when hon/dota thread was actually about getting together to play or people asking for advice and actually taking/following it. Now it's like borderline to the point of me admitting I'd rather have RPF back than read this crap.
I mean..look at gummy's math post. Is that serious?
Rabidch, alventenie...these are people you should probably listen to if you post here at all.
In summary: Please stfu about support theory sm3agol
|
To get this thread back on track: What do you guys think about DS/Tempest lane? DS farming solo, Temp jungling. Once in a while Temp comes out of the jungle, stun -> entangle -> surround with elementals -> healing wave -> back to farming.
|
On October 15 2011 04:49 Gummy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 04:17 rabidch wrote:On October 15 2011 03:52 Sm3agol wrote:On October 15 2011 03:44 rabidch wrote:On October 15 2011 03:15 Sm3agol wrote:On October 15 2011 03:00 Durak wrote:On October 15 2011 02:09 Sm3agol wrote:On October 15 2011 01:05 Alventenie wrote:On October 15 2011 00:32 Boblion wrote:On October 14 2011 22:08 Sm3agol wrote:
TLDR:Support is really fun, you should try it some time. Yea playing support is awesome, especially ws when you just stun and give them the kills and then they say that you have a shitty K/D LOL I support a lot of my games and I don't have shitty KDR. Then you are probably doing it wrong. Unless you are playing a "support" like plague who has a super powerful damage ulti + amazing damage Q, you SHOULD have a negative kdr. That means you gave the kills to your carry and sacrificed yourself to keep him alive a few times. The thing is, you can have a positive KDR and play support properly. The common mentality that supports must have negative KDR is due to poor play and false justification. The foremost reason for a negative KDR is that bad support players often wrack up deaths unnecessarily. They'll ward poorly by going to dangerous positions on their own rather than with team support (or just at the right time). They'll also "sacrifice themselves for the carry" when they actually didn't need to die. They'll have bad positioning and get picked off, either in a team fight or while moving around the map (as they're squishy). Alventenie is good and knows what he's talking about. That's evidence that there is a way to play support without killing stealing and yet have a positive KDR. What you should think is, "This good support player has a positive KDR so there must be something else to playing support properly that I'm missing." Edit: Oh, he posted while I took a long time to type.  Alv gives some good examples. You are most certainly correct with the last statement, I do stand somewhat corrected. It's just that there are only a limited amount of kills to go around ,and simple math means the kills/deaths for each team have to come from somewhere. Assuming equal teams on both sides it is mathematically impossible for the supports to have a positive KDR, regardless of skill, and not gimp the carries in the process. If the carries are getting kills and allowed to farm without dying(aka, you're doing your job properly), and you are also maintaining a positive KDR as a pure support, not to mention your gankers, that isn't amazing support play per se, you're just raping their entire team. I'm basically saying if you're consistently having a positive KDR as a support, you probably should be carrying or at least a dedicated ganker type.... Now keep in mind my experience here, and where I'm coming from. I am fully willing to be proved wrong. My HoN experience consist of my fairly terrible(I'm new to playing...watched Honcasts, some Dota and testie for a while) 1550 MMR play, watching testie, and watching Honcasts of the best of the best at HoN. I have basically no experience with the middle ground, aka "decent HoN play" where you are at right now. TLDR: Shouldn't you be playing heroes that benefit more from having a positive KDR? you're talking too much about things you havent done and probably dont do very well against somebody who has much more experience and skill than you. thats called being naive. here theres a huge difference between your gut feeling theory and actual in game experience. i realize that not everybody is aware of this when they discuss the game, but please, spare us your theorycrafting now and actually get better first. you also lack a real mathematical proof, let alone a real mathematical argument, that states that supports should have negative kdr Hypothetical game. Equal skill on both sides. 50 kills for each side. If one side has their carries at a 3:1 k/d ratio, with their supports at 1:3(bad ratio math lol), while the other team has a 1:1 k/d all the way around, I'm pretty sure the team with the stacked carries has the advantage. only covers one (im)possibility of many. why 50 kills and why should they be equal? why 3:1 ratio? you just picked completely arbitrary numbers without any regard to lineups, levels, time in game, map control. if you want to make a sound argument, you cover all cases, and it has to be at least feasible. 50 kills for each side is an uncommon number for the number of kills in a game, especially it being an equal number. ok assuming pigeonholing roles is a good idea (and it really isnt), lets assume team 1 has 3:1 carry kd ratio and 1:3 support kd ratio. there are 4 supports and 1 carry on that team. now lets assume that team 2 is at 1:1 kd ratio all around. there are 4 carries and 1 support on that team. can you say that team 1 has an advantage over team 2 in most cases? ok, lets say you can. now let n be then number of kills (equal in the game). for the case of 0 < n < 10 can you make the same reasoning? how about 10 < n < 20? how about 20< n < 30? how about 50 < n 100? how about 100 < n < 10000? and lets just say what if team 2 was a push strat and team 1 couldnt defend pushes at all, then how does it change? His argument is sufficiently specified and totally valid. I don't know why you have a stick up your ass but his argument works for all N. But let's rigorize this: if both teams have the same number of kills N (for the sake of keeping consistent domain lets only do N s.t. N mod 5=0), then the average per team is N/5 kills and N/5 deaths. Also we consider only "well-composed" teams of 5 with >= 1 support and >= 1 carry. We define the following partial ordering on player-tagged KDR vectors e: e = <player 1(i): (Ki:kills,Di:deaths), player 2: (kill,death), player3: (kill,death), etc....> with the constraints that the ordinary pairwise sum of player i (kill,death) across all i in [1..5] = (50,50). Thus our partial ordering can be computed based on a linear combination objective function using the indicator variable Ci that takes the value "1" if player i is a carry and 0 otherwise: u*(e) = sum(Ci * (Ki - Di)) across all i in [1..5]. We use Kill minus Deaths as a metric because it is nicer mathematically and you don't have issues of undefined values when D = 0. It is trivial to show that the mapping from KMD and KDR is monotonic wherever KDR is actually defined, however. Finally, we presume that kills and death can be "allocated" across players. This is not an entirely unrealistic assumption, seeing as many support heroes have abilities with which they can sacrifice themselves to save teammates. Nymphora ult-stun combo, engineer ult, rhapsody ult and tank, andro swap, etc.... Obviously left out of this model from the previous assumption is the "ease" with which certain heroes can get kills or escape from being killed at different points in the game. Also skill level of the individual players and communication issues are ignored. For example, if a support gets a kill because he is solo and gets bum-rushed in a tower, that's not a re-allocable kill in a real game, but our model presumes that all kills are reallocable. (Maybe there was a ward there and nymphora tele'd a scout in just in time to get the kill). Now for some observations: Proposition: There exists an optimal allocation of kills and deaths with at least 1 support with KDR <= 1. Proof: + Show Spoiler +By the MVT, there must be at least one character on each team that has >= N/5 deaths. Would you rather that person with N/5 deaths be a carry or a support? Support, obviously, from the computation of u*.
On the flipside of the MVT, there must be at least one character on each team that has >= N/5 kills. Would you rather that person be a carry or a support? Carry, obviously.
Likewise, at least one character has to have <= N/5 deaths. You would obviously want that to be a carry.
One character has to have <= N/5 kills. You want that to be a support.
Thus, with locally optimal decisions (since our partial ordering is based on a real-mapped objective function they are also valid with respect to globally optimality), you can easily construct a situation where the same support is the one with >= N/5 deaths and <= N/5 and thus has a KDR of <= 1. Thus we have proven existence. But now that we have this framework, we can prove a stronger statement about optimality: Proposition: If a support in this situation has > 1 KDR (KMD > 0), the kill/death allocation is suboptimal. Proof: + Show Spoiler +This is trivial really. Assume by way of contradiction that the allocation e with a support having > 1 KDR is optimal. Then for all other allocations f, we have u*(e) >= u*(f). But if we take 1 kill from the support and give it to an arbitrary carry, our new allocation f', which is guaranteed to be well-defined since KMD > 0, has value u*(f') = u*(e) + 1 > u*(e), so we have a contradiction.
Thus, we have shown that with the given assumptions, no support should have >1 KDR.
e = <player 1(i): (Ki:kills,Di:deaths), player 2: (kill,death), player3: (kill,death), etc....> with the constraints that the ordinary pairwise sum of player i (kill,death) across all i in [1..5] = (50,50).
small error. [1..5] = (N,N), not to mention it assumes that you absolutely have to have a 1:1 team kdr...
definition of u* as a reasonable model of winning HoN games is shaky because there are too many factors such as towers, map control (more or less needs to take into account farm efficiency and needs real ganking statistics), gold, and more, none of which you take into account, and have to if you want to prove optimality for winning a HoN game which is really what sm3agol is talking about
and even with these missing terms, the choosing of constant C is rather shaky, since if you are support C = 0 and well that means supports have no value for optimizing u*, and if we assume the model to be a reasonable model of HoN, it means that supports don't have any value and you might as well pick 4 carries !
On October 15 2011 05:10 Ack1027 wrote:
I'm just saying like....this is why I stopped giving 2 shits about this thread.
Like, do you guys remember when hon/dota thread was actually about getting together to play or people asking for advice and actually taking/following it. Now it's like borderline to the point of me admitting I'd rather have RPF back than read this crap.
I mean..look at gummy's math post. Is that serious?
Rabidch, alventenie...these are people you should probably listen to if you post here at all.
In summary: Please stfu about support theory sm3agol
claymores > roh
nobody wants to admit that in the last 3* pages the thread has been more entertaining than it has been in the last couple weeks 
|
i think semantics deserves the glory of keeping things fresh and interesting
|
On October 15 2011 05:11 Manit0u wrote:
To get this thread back on track: What do you guys think about DS/Tempest lane? DS farming solo, Temp jungling. Once in a while Temp comes out of the jungle, stun -> entangle -> surround with elementals -> healing wave -> back to farming.
the problem is that this thread has been nothing but this all the time. why do you want to discuss a tempest ds lane? did you try it and failed? (if so, where are the replays?) did you try it and won a few games with it? (then why do you need confirmation?) did you see someone do it? (where are the replays?) did you just theorycraft this? (why do you not test it and share your findings?)
the discussions i see in this thread over and over just fail to supply a question or problem that actually deserves an answer with the way they are presented.
this is in itself a smart thing to do for people who know that their playstyle is flawed or unsuccessful, because they get the chance of talking to vastly superior players and debate their own ideas on seemingly equal grounds to convince themselves of being better than they are.
this self-deception works brilliantly because there are some actually good players in this thread who are willing to incur the questions asked without pointing out their irrelevance to the often common problems hinted at in the questions asked.
in short:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=113479
read this, follow it. or just use your head when asking a question. either one works, i promise!
|
@rabidch: it is the I that is in (1..N) not the pair indexed by I. The only point of the objective function is to capture the notion that all other things equal you should give carries the kills. So long as the c for a carry is greater than c for support the induced ordering of allocations e is identical. this model says nothing about team picks, but assumes optimality in kill and death allocation given a team composition. There is no intent to compare optimal allocations among different team compositions nor does it make sense to since the picking phase happens ex ante any kill allocation.
The real point of all this analysis is that if you're an andro and your carry is about to get face stomped, you should take one for the team. Likewise, if you set up a kill, you should let your carry get the last hit whenever possible.
|
On October 15 2011 05:59 Gummy wrote:
@rabidch: it is the I that is in (1..N) not the pair indexed by I. The only point of the objective function is to capture the notion that all other things equal you should give carries the kills. So long as the c for a carry is greater than c for support the induced ordering of allocations e is identical. this model says nothing about team picks, but assumes optimality in kill and death allocation given a team composition. There is no intent to compare optimal allocations among different team compositions nor does it make sense to since the picking phase happens ex ante any kill allocation.
The real point of all this analysis is that if you're an andro and your carry is about to get face stomped, you should take one for the team. Likewise, if you set up a kill, you should let your carry get the last hit whenever possible.
the sum across i should be N, not 50. im not going to restate the entire thing as out of laziness, but you're only nitpicking over what i said (i'm hardly a mathematician anyway)
while what i claimed is incorrect, it doesnt actually matter if the picking phase happens before any kill allocation, because theres 2 teams that are in a game and the number of kills and deaths are set for each team to be equal. its just that the chances for one team with more carries having a higher u* value than another one has the same chances for that team with more carries to have a lower u* value. so in reality the model suggests that team composition doesnt matter in light of u*, but i suppose thats expected since the laws of hon require the number of kills and deaths for both teams to be the same
what kind of metric u* gives is is left ambiguous.
|
On October 15 2011 07:10 rabidch wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 05:59 Gummy wrote:
@rabidch: it is the I that is in (1..N) not the pair indexed by I. The only point of the objective function is to capture the notion that all other things equal you should give carries the kills. So long as the c for a carry is greater than c for support the induced ordering of allocations e is identical. this model says nothing about team picks, but assumes optimality in kill and death allocation given a team composition. There is no intent to compare optimal allocations among different team compositions nor does it make sense to since the picking phase happens ex ante any kill allocation.
The real point of all this analysis is that if you're an andro and your carry is about to get face stomped, you should take one for the team. Likewise, if you set up a kill, you should let your carry get the last hit whenever possible. the sum across i should be N, not 50. im not going to restate the entire thing as out of laziness, but you're only nitpicking over what i said (i'm hardly a mathematician anyway) while what i claimed is incorrect, it doesnt actually matter if the picking phase happens before any kill allocation, because theres 2 teams that are in a game and the number of kills and deaths are set for each team to be equal. its just that the chances for one team with more carries having a higher u* value than another one has the same chances for that team with more carries to have a lower u* value. so in reality the model suggests that team composition doesnt matter in light of u*, but i suppose thats expected since the laws of hon require the number of kills and deaths for both teams to be the same what kind of metric u* gives is is left ambiguous.
Oh I see what you mean. Yeah I introduced a concrete number accidentally as opposed to the N. Fixed. Thanks.
The whole idea of u* is to induce a partial ordering on a given set of kill/death allocations. That set of allocations is defined based on the initial team composition. As a parallel to economics, we have individual utility functions that are arbitrary so long as they induce the same relative order in preference among bundles of goods and services. To compare the utility function of different individuals however, becomes meaningless.
You definitely have a point where team compositions and differences in skill/communication will cause the constraint of team kdr /= 1:1, but I am naively trying to establish a rigorous framework supporting sm3agol's intuitive assertion that all other things being static, "carry deaths hurt more than support deaths/ carry kills help more than support kills, therefore supports should optimally have <=1 KDR."
Edit: I used the term partial ordering a bunch anticipating that I'd be working with KDRs (which can be undefined when you have no deaths), but since my objective function is now everywhere real-valued, we actually have the nice special case of the partial ordering, the total ordering!
Offtopic: Holy shit, I just got my report button! :D
Edit: Fuck, I can't report myself 
|
Nasty, nasty lane is oliphant + ds. Oliphant charges in, carries creep wave with him, DS heal bombs for 600+ damage and they start out half a level ahead from oliphants creep eating.
|
On October 15 2011 07:22 Nevuk wrote:
Nasty, nasty lane is oliphant + ds. Oliphant charges in, carries creep wave with him, DS heal bombs for 600+ damage and they start out half a level ahead from oliphants creep eating.
DS's heal wave doesn't do 600+ at level 1. I don't think you hit that damage range until level 4 heal wave. Don't get me wrong, that combo sounds strong, but if you're looking for really powerful gank-lanes, there are some really really nasty ones.
|
matches not recording again, fffff
|
On October 15 2011 07:13 Gummy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 07:10 rabidch wrote:On October 15 2011 05:59 Gummy wrote:
@rabidch: it is the I that is in (1..N) not the pair indexed by I. The only point of the objective function is to capture the notion that all other things equal you should give carries the kills. So long as the c for a carry is greater than c for support the induced ordering of allocations e is identical. this model says nothing about team picks, but assumes optimality in kill and death allocation given a team composition. There is no intent to compare optimal allocations among different team compositions nor does it make sense to since the picking phase happens ex ante any kill allocation.
The real point of all this analysis is that if you're an andro and your carry is about to get face stomped, you should take one for the team. Likewise, if you set up a kill, you should let your carry get the last hit whenever possible. the sum across i should be N, not 50. im not going to restate the entire thing as out of laziness, but you're only nitpicking over what i said (i'm hardly a mathematician anyway) while what i claimed is incorrect, it doesnt actually matter if the picking phase happens before any kill allocation, because theres 2 teams that are in a game and the number of kills and deaths are set for each team to be equal. its just that the chances for one team with more carries having a higher u* value than another one has the same chances for that team with more carries to have a lower u* value. so in reality the model suggests that team composition doesnt matter in light of u*, but i suppose thats expected since the laws of hon require the number of kills and deaths for both teams to be the same what kind of metric u* gives is is left ambiguous. Oh I see what you mean. Yeah I introduced a concrete number accidentally as opposed to the N. Fixed. Thanks. The whole idea of u* is to induce a partial ordering on a given set of kill/death allocations. That set of allocations is defined based on the initial team composition. As a parallel to economics, we have individual utility functions that are arbitrary so long as they induce the same relative order in preference among bundles of goods and services. To compare the utility function of different individuals however, becomes meaningless. You definitely have a point where team compositions and differences in skill/communication will cause the constraint of team kdr /= 1:1, but I am naively trying to establish a rigorous framework supporting sm3agol's intuitive assertion that all other things being static, "carry deaths hurt more than support deaths/ carry kills help more than support kills, therefore supports should optimally have <=1 KDR." Edit: I used the term partial ordering a bunch anticipating that I'd be working with KDRs (which can be undefined when you have no deaths), but since my objective function is now everywhere real-valued, we actually have the nice special case of the partial ordering, the total ordering! Offtopic: Holy shit, I just got my report button! :D Edit: Fuck, I can't report myself
well its rather unrealistic to state that there is no other team when you are competing exclusively against another team.
what sm3agol actually said, oddly enough, is that if you have positive KDR against them while your carry is farming its just raping them and realistically you should have negative KDR, not whatever you think he said. additionally, he said they had an "advantage" over the other team, so you also didn't consider that he was thinking about the other team too...
|
On October 15 2011 05:48 Glull wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 05:11 Manit0u wrote:
To get this thread back on track: What do you guys think about DS/Tempest lane? DS farming solo, Temp jungling. Once in a while Temp comes out of the jungle, stun -> entangle -> surround with elementals -> healing wave -> back to farming. the problem is that this thread has been nothing but this all the time. why do you want to discuss a tempest ds lane? did you try it and failed? (if so, where are the replays?) did you try it and won a few games with it? (then why do you need confirmation?) did you see someone do it? (where are the replays?) did you just theorycraft this? (why do you not test it and share your findings?) the discussions i see in this thread over and over just fail to supply a question or problem that actually deserves an answer with the way they are presented. this is in itself a smart thing to do for people who know that their playstyle is flawed or unsuccessful, because they get the chance of talking to vastly superior players and debate their own ideas on seemingly equal grounds to convince themselves of being better than they are. this self-deception works brilliantly because there are some actually good players in this thread who are willing to incur the questions asked without pointing out their irrelevance to the often common problems hinted at in the questions asked. in short: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=113479read this, follow it. or just use your head when asking a question. either one works, i promise!
Why so bitter Glu? This thread has been off the rails for ages now and most of the valuable discussion (like when some pro games were being played and there was an on-going debate here) has died.
This thread really is a sinusoid, do you remember all the spam, off-topic, "ze" stuff etc. that was going on here?
And about the question: I haven't seen such line before (DS running solo is rather unpopular on the competetive scene, but maybe after their latest game TDM is going to re-introduce it) and I can't really test it out properly because of a couple of reasons:
1. I haven't really been active for several months so my mechanics are out the window for now.
2. I'm not really a great farmer, thus defeating the purpose of going solo in lane.
3. I can't play Tempest for the love of me.
Sure it's all theorycrafting, but on the possible side. Tempest and DS are both great heroes worth picking up, DS can run solo lane easily and even dominate solo powerhouses like Torturer (as proven by Swindle), jungle is Tempest's natural environment and synergy between his elementals and healing wave is undeniable.
My entire question really boils down to: Do you think this would be a viable setup? Or it's too many factors that must come together to be reliable?
I'm using this thread for it, because I know that there are really good players around here that can simply answer "yes, it's good" or "no, it's bad" and thus solve the issue for me or anyone else who might have such question.
|
Damn I'm bad...
Match ID: 64968504
Could you guys tell me what areas I should focus on improving first? Need to get back on track somehow and I must admit I feel a bit lost after long absence from the game.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On October 15 2011 08:22 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 05:48 Glull wrote:On October 15 2011 05:11 Manit0u wrote:
To get this thread back on track: What do you guys think about DS/Tempest lane? DS farming solo, Temp jungling. Once in a while Temp comes out of the jungle, stun -> entangle -> surround with elementals -> healing wave -> back to farming. the problem is that this thread has been nothing but this all the time. why do you want to discuss a tempest ds lane? did you try it and failed? (if so, where are the replays?) did you try it and won a few games with it? (then why do you need confirmation?) did you see someone do it? (where are the replays?) did you just theorycraft this? (why do you not test it and share your findings?) the discussions i see in this thread over and over just fail to supply a question or problem that actually deserves an answer with the way they are presented. this is in itself a smart thing to do for people who know that their playstyle is flawed or unsuccessful, because they get the chance of talking to vastly superior players and debate their own ideas on seemingly equal grounds to convince themselves of being better than they are. this self-deception works brilliantly because there are some actually good players in this thread who are willing to incur the questions asked without pointing out their irrelevance to the often common problems hinted at in the questions asked. in short: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=113479read this, follow it. or just use your head when asking a question. either one works, i promise! Why so bitter Glu? This thread has been off the rails for ages now and most of the valuable discussion (like when some pro games were being played and there was an on-going debate here) has died. This thread really is a sinusoid, do you remember all the spam, off-topic, "ze" stuff etc. that was going on here? And about the question: I haven't seen such line before (DS running solo is rather unpopular on the competetive scene, but maybe after their latest game TDM is going to re-introduce it) and I can't really test it out properly because of a couple of reasons: 1. I haven't really been active for several months so my mechanics are out the window for now. 2. I'm not really a great farmer, thus defeating the purpose of going solo in lane. 3. I can't play Tempest for the love of me. Sure it's all theorycrafting, but on the possible side. Tempest and DS are both great heroes worth picking up, DS can run solo lane easily and even dominate solo powerhouses like Torturer (as proven by Swindle), jungle is Tempest's natural environment and synergy between his elementals and healing wave is undeniable. My entire question really boils down to: Do you think this would be a viable setup? Or it's too many factors that must come together to be reliable? I'm using this thread for it, because I know that there are really good players around here that can simply answer "yes, it's good" or "no, it's bad" and thus solve the issue for me or anyone else who might have such question.
i am not bitter, and i was even considering emphasising that by adding a paragraph explaining that i merely took your scenario because it is the most recent example of what i explained in my post. it has nothing to do with you personally. my apologies if that seemed to be the case.
in the paragraph where you explain what your question "boils down to", you ask two questions with very different ideas behind them - and if the questions are answered straight forward you will not learn a thing.
is it a viable setup? yes.
is it too many factors to be reliable? no.
so the answer to your final paragraph is "yes, it's good".
however, if you had provided more detail - such as an example lineup (thats 10 heroes!) the answers might be vastly different.
also, if you ask me if i believe having tempest+ds as a commonly used strategy for a team is a good idea, my answer would be "no, not at all". a solo ds often works similar to a solo succubus - as a counter to certain heroes that are otherwise hard to play against. the difference is that ds is used in a push strategy while succubus puts more emphasis on ganking for your team. having the tempest+ds synergy is good because they both push, but the gank potential with the combinations you mentioned is almost irrelevant because of elemental ms, enemy awareness and the already existing gank potential tempest has on its own.
the above paragraph is not the answer to the questions you asked, and yet it is the information you are looking for.
|
On October 15 2011 10:53 Manit0u wrote:
Damn I'm bad...
Match ID: 64968504
Could you guys tell me what areas I should focus on improving first? Need to get back on track somehow and I must admit I feel a bit lost after long absence from the game.
dont try to support that much. for that particular game, dont get the aura for your team. dont sacrifice everything you can to give your teammates a slight edge. at the level of that game, this "small edge" does not outweigh the lack of levels and items that results for yourself. the worse the players get, the more blurry the line between player roles usually is.
if you had skilled both nukes early, you could (and should) have completely dominated vj top and set up gladiator for a stronger midgame.
get the rune ward up before minute two and do not buy three wards+courier in the first 3 minutes.
harass more, attack your own creeps, set up lasthits and control the lane instead of roaming too much early - it simply is not very effective with your current grasp of the game (in that particular game).
you didnt play bad, you just didnt play it right.
just play a few more games to get back into it, then ask again.
|
|
|
blah goddamn losing streak
|
Anyone know what kind of viewers the Hon Nasl matches are getting?
I don't really watch them myself. All of the hon viewing I seem to do is just watch the banning/picking, see boring heroes and someone getting outpicked and then I'll end up not watching the actual match >:
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
